THE ROUTLEDGE COMPANION TO

POPULAR MUSIC ANALYSIS

The Routledge Companion to Popular Music Analysis: Expanding Approaches widens the scope of
­analytical approaches for popular music. This study endeavors to create a new analytical paradigm
for examining popular music by taking the perspective of developments in contemporary art
music.
“Expanded approaches” for popular music analysis is broadly defined as exploring the pitch-
class structures, form, timbre, rhythm, or aesthetics of various forms of popular music in a con-
ceptual space not limited to the domain of common practice tonality but broadened to include
any applicable compositional, analytical, or theoretical concept that illuminates the music. The
essays in this collection investigate a variety of analytical, theoretical, historical, and aesthetic com-
monalities popular music shares with 20th and 21st century art music. From rock and pop to hip
hop and rap, dance and electronica, from the 1930s to present day, this companion explores these
connections in five parts:

•• Establishing and Expanding Analytical Frameworks

•• Technology and Timbre
•• Rhythm, Pitch, and Harmony
•• Form and Structure
•• Critical Frameworks: Analytical, Formal, Structural, and Political

With contributions by established scholars and promising emerging scholars in music theory and
historical musicology from North America, Europe, and Australia, The Routledge Companion to
Popular Music Analysis: Expanding Approaches offers nuanced and detailed perspectives that address
the relationships between concert and popular music.
Ciro Scotto is Associate Professor and Chair of the Music Theory Department at Ohio University, US.
Kenneth Smith is Senior Lecturer in Music at the University of Liverpool, UK.
John Brackett is Music Instructor at Vance-Granville Community College, US.
Routledge Music Companions offer thorough, high-quality surveys and assessments of major
topics in the study of music. All entries in each companion are specially commissioned
and written by leading scholars in the field. Clear, accessible, and cutting-edge, these com-
panions are the ideal resource for advanced undergraduates, postgraduate students, and
researchers alike.

The Routledge Companion to Music, Mind, and Well-being

Edited by Penelope Gouk, James Kennaway, Jacomien Prins, and Wiebke Thormählen

The Routledge Companion to Jazz Studies

Edited by Nicholas Gebhardt, Nichole Rustin-Paschal, and Tony Whyton

The Routledge Companion to Popular Music Analysis

Expanding Approaches
Edited by Ciro Scotto, Kenneth Smith, and John Brackett

The Routledge Companion to the Study of Local Musicking

Edited by Suzel A. Reily and Katherine Brucher

The Routledge Companion to Music Cognition

Edited by Richard Ashley and Renee Timmers

The Routledge Companion to Screen Music and Sound

Edited by Miguel Mera, Ronald Sadoff, and Ben Winters

The Routledge Companion to Embodied Music Interaction

Edited by Micheline Lesaffre, Pieter-Jan Maes, and Marc Leman

The Routledge Companion to Music, Technology, and Education

Edited by Andrew King, Evangelos Himonides, and S. Alex Ruthmann

The Routledge Companion to Sounding Art

Edited by Marcel Cobussen,Vincent Meelberg, and Barry Truax

The Routledge Companion to Music and Visual Culture

Edited by Tim Shephard and Anne Leonard
THE ROUTLEDGE COMPANION
TO POPULAR MUSIC ANALYSIS
Expanding Approaches

Edited by
Ciro Scotto, Kenneth Smith, and John Brackett
First published 2019
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
©  2019 Taylor & Francis
The right of Ciro Scotto, Kenneth Smith, and John Brackett to be
identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors
for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with
sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical,
or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks
or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Scotto, Ciro. | Smith, Kenneth M. | Brackett, John Lowell.
Title: The Routledge companion to popular music analysis:
expanding approaches / edited by Ciro Scotto, Kenneth Smith,
John Brackett.
Description: New York: Routledge, 2018. | Includes bibliographical
references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018022353 (print) | LCCN 2018025025 (ebook) |
ISBN 9781315544700 (ebook) | ISBN 9781138683112 (hardback)
Subjects: LCSH: Popular music–Analysis, appreciation. | Popular
music–History and criticism. | Musical analysis.
Classification: LCC MT146 (ebook) | LCC MT146 .R72 2018 (print) |
DDC 781.64/117–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018022353
ISBN: 978-1-138-68311-2 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-54470-0 (ebk)
Typeset in Bembo
by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India
 CONTENTS

List of Figures viii

List of Tables xiv
Prefacexvi

PART 1
Establishing and Expanding Analytical Frameworks 1

1 Some Practical Issues in the Aesthetic Analysis of Popular Music 3

Christopher Doll

2 Style as Analysis 15
Phil Ford

3 Thank You for the Music 29

Giles Hooper

4 Listening to the Sound Music Makes 45

Allan F. Moore

5 Analyse This:  Types and Tactics of Self-Referential Songs 58

Bethany Lowe with Freya Jarman

6 A-ha’s “Take on Me”: Melody, Vocal Compulsion, and Rotoscoping 77

Stan Hawkins and Jon Mikkel Broch Ålvik

7 Interpreting Transmedia and Multimodal Narratives: Steven Wilson’s

“The Raven That Refused to Sing” 95
Lori Burns

v
 Contents

PART 2
Technology and Timbre 115

  8 Analysing the Product of Recorded Musical Activity 117

Simon Zagorski-Thomas

  9 The Production of Timbre: Analyzing the Sonic Signatures of

Tool’s Æ nima (1996) 133
Kevin Osborn and Brad Osborn

10 “What Music Isn’t Ambient in the 21st Century?”: A Design-Oriented

Approach to Analyzing and Interpreting Ambient Music Recordings 144
Victor Szabo

11 Electronically Modified Voices as Expressing the (Post)Human

Condition in Daft Punk’s Random Access Memories (2013) 159
Jane Piper Clendinning

PART 3
Rhythm, Pitch, and Harmony 177

12 Pulse as Dynamic Attending: Analysing Beat Bin Metre

in Neo Soul Grooves 179
Anne Danielsen

13 Rhythmic Functions in Pop-Rock Music 190

Nicole Biamonte

14 The Aesthetics of Drone 207

Jonathan W. Bernard

15 A Tonal Axis to Grind: The Central Dyad in Sonic

Youth’s Divergent Textures 221
David Heetderks

16 Chromatic Linear Progressions in Popular Music 235

Neil Newton

17 System 7 249
Ciro Scotto

18 Emerson, Lake and Palmer’s ‘Toccata’ and the

Cyborg Essence of Alberto Ginastera 265
Kevin Holm-Hudson

vi
 Contents

PART 4
Form and Structure 275

19 Yes, the Psychedelic-Symphonic Cover, and “Every Little Thing” 277

John Covach

20 ‘Silence in the Studio!’: Collage as Retransition in Pink Floyd’s

‘Atom Heart Mother Suite’ 291
Shaugn O’Donnell

21 “Weed Crumbles into Glitter”: Representing a

Marijuana High in Frank Ocean’s Blonde 300
John Brackett

22 Form and Time in Trout Mask Replica 315

Peter Silberman

PART 5
Critical Frameworks: Analytical, Formal, Structural, and Political 333

23 New Music in a Borderless World 335

Marianna Ritchey

24 Here Lies Love and the Politics of Disco-Opera 347

Áine Mangaoang

25 The Love Detective: Cybernetic Cycles and the Mysteries

of Desire in Arab Strap 364
Stephen Overy and Kenneth Smith

26 Unending Eruptions: White-Collar Metal Appropriations of Classical

Complexity, Experimentation, Elitism, and Cultural Legitimization 378
Eric Smialek and Méi-Ra St-Laurent

27 Hearing Postmemory: Anne Frank in Neutral Milk Hotel’s

In the Aeroplane over the Sea 400
Michael Spitzer

28 “Poet-Composers”: Art and Legitimacy in the

Singer-Songwriter Movement 416
Christa Anne Bentley

Notes on Contributors 427

Index434

vii
 FIGURES

1.1 Reduction of Brown’s Transcription of the “A Hard Day’s Night” Chord 5

1.2a Vocal Pitch in “Here Comes the Sun” Version 1  6
1.2b Version 2 6
1.3a Snare Drum Patterns in “Sikamikanico” Transcribed in One Tempo, Intro  7
1.3b From Verse  7
1.3c From Transition  7
1.3d Pre-Chorus  7
1.3e Chorus  8
1.3f From Bridge  8
1.3g Outro 8
1.4 Displacement and Alignment in “Autumn,” mm. 12–19 9
1.5 Pentatonicism in “Submission” 10
2.1 Schenker’s graph for Beethoven, Op. 57, 1st movement. 20
3.1 Transcription of opening guitar riff of “Smells Like Teen Spirit” 35
5.1 “Hallelujah” 61
5.2 “The Lost Chord” 63
5.3 “Interval Song” 63
5.4 “ABC” 65
5.5 “I Know a Song That’ll Get on Your Nerves”  71
6.1 Fanfare from “Take on Me” 79
6.2 Melody, Lyrics, and Chords in “Take on Me” 81
6.3 A-ha: “Lesson One” (chorus) 86
6.4 A-ha: “Take on Me” (chorus) 86
6.5 Escaping through the Ripped Wall 87
6.6 Forlorn Yet Victorious 88
7.1 “The Raven,” wave and spectrographic data; formal design 102
7.2a Opening string chord 103
7. 2b 7/4 piano ostinato 103

viii
 Figures

7. 2c Vocoder melody, interlude 1 103

7.2d Interlude 2 (2:18), violin melody 103
7.2e Close of interlude 2, before verse 3: guitar/piano
elaboration of ostinato 104
7.2f Pre-chorus melody in guitar, piano, and violin 104
7.2g Chorus vocal melody 104
7.2h Reprise of piano ostinato figure to close pre-chorus
and chorus sections 104
7.2i Final string trichord 104
8.1 Rhythmic Patterns in the Accompaniment 125
8.2 Tonality/Harmonic Patterns 126
8.3 Graphic Representation of Chorus Vocals Taken from
Melodyne Software 127
8.4 Indé pendance Cha Cha Structure—Eleven 32-Beat Sections 128
10.1 “Unfamiliar Wind” wind loops 149
11.1 Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions 164
12.1 Waveform and spectrogram (0-8000 Hz) of one bar of the groove
in “1000 Deaths” 183
12.2 Waveform and spectrogram (0-8000 Hz) of one bar of the groove in
“1000 Deaths” 184
12.3 Widened metric expectation (beat bin meter) in “1000 Deaths” 185
13.1 Sample backbeat patterns 192
13.2 Rolling Stones, “It’s Only Rock and Roll”, last phrase of chorus 1 193
13.3 Led Zeppelin, “Houses of the Holy”, first half of verse 1 194
13.4 Rolling Stones, “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction”, first phrase of verse 1 195
13.5 Aerosmith, “Dream On”, first phrase of chorus 2 196
13.6 Yes, “Roundabout”, melody of verse 1 196
13.7 Bon Jovi, “Runaway”, introduction 197
13.8 AC/DC, “Hell’s Bells”, introduction 198
13.9a Jimi Hendrix, “Spanish Castle Magic”, beginning of verse 199
13.9b Jimi Hendrix, “Spanish Castle Magic”, beginning of chorus 199
14.1 Phill Niblock partial score instructions 211
14.2 “Dronitude” from the sleeve of one of Phill Niblock’s records 211
14.3 Charlemagne Palestine, Strumming Music for Bö sendorfer Piano, pitch
development in the first two large sections 212
15.1 “Shadow of a Doubt” by Kim Gordon, Thurston Moore, Lee Ranaldo,
and Steve Shelley, introduction and verse 223
15.2 “Androgynous Mind” by Kim Gordon, Thurston Moore, Lee Ranaldo,
and Steve Shelley 224
15.3 “Green Light” by Kim Gordon, Thurston Moore, Lee Ranaldo, and
Steve Shelley, introduction 226
15.4 “Green Light”, start of instrumental bridge 227
15.5 “Green Light”, partial restatement of verse and coda 228
15.6 “Pacific Coast Highway” by Kim Gordon, Thurston Moore, Lee
Ranaldo, and Steve Shelley 229

ix
 Figures

15.7 Formal diagram of “Pacific Coast Highway” 231

16.1 Modulations between macroharmonies using a four-note CLP 237
16.2 “Rocket Man” by Elton John 238
16.3 “At Seventeen” by Janis Ian 240
16.4 “At Seventeen” verse guitar 241
16.5 “Summer in the City” by Lovin’ Spoonful 241
16.6 “Something” by The Beatles 242
16.7 “Something”, guitar motif in The Beatles 243
16.8 “Sun King” by The Beatles 244
16.9 “I Hope I Never” by Split Enz 245
16.10 “Can’t Take My Eyes off of  You” by Frankie Valli 246
17.1 Adaptation of a mode generator chart for the minor pentatonic scale
from The Guitar Grimoire by Adam Kadmon 251
17.2 Adaptation of chord/scale chart from The Guitar Grimoire
by Adam Kadmon 252
17.3 Opening riff of “Orion” from Master of Puppets by Metallica 255
17.4 Main riff or motive from “Iron Man” from Paranoid
by Black Sabbath 256
17.5 Main riff of “Blackened” from And Justice for All by Metallica 258
17.6 Extended supermode that includes E Aeolian and E Locrian 258
17.7 Bridge section from “Blackened” by Metallica 259
17.8 The Phrygian Dominant collection 260
17.9 Introductory motive from “Where the Wild Things Are”
by Metallica 260
17.10 Introduction of set class 3-3[0,1,4] in the vocal part 261
17.11 Set class 3-5[0,1,6] in the bridge to the first verse 261
17.12 Extended supermode that includes E Phrygian and E Locrian 261
17.13 Set class 3-3[0,1,4] from A Phrygian Dominant in the pre-chorus 261
17.14 E Phrygian Dominant at the opening of the guitar solo 262
18.1 Ginastera, Piano Concerto No. 1, 4th movement
(Toccata concertata), bars 1–4 268
18.2 Relational networks for bars 1–2 269
18.3 Ginastera, Piano Concerto No. 1, 4th movement
(Toccata concertata), bars 25–29 269
18.4 Emerson, Lake and Palmer, ‘Toccata,’ Emerson’s
synthesiser entrance at [0:29] 270
18.5 ‘Toccata,’ guitar/bass development of the 3-5 [0, 1, 6] motive,
interpolated at [4:24–5:05] 272
18.6 ‘Toccata,’ synthesiser sequence accompanying Palmer’s
percussion-synthesiser cadenza at [5:05–6:09] 273
18.7 Relational network for Palmer’s percussion-synthesiser sequence 273
19.1 Form in “You Keep Me Hangin’ On,” words and music
by Holland-Dozier-Holland 281

x
 Figures

19.2 Yes covers and sources 283

19.3 Timing and key comparisons 284
19.4 Verse and chorus of “Every Little Thing” 284
19.5 Form in “Every Little Thing,” words and music by Lennon
and McCartney 285
20.1 First Theme, ‘Father’s Shout’ 295
20.2 Second Theme, ‘Breast Milky’ 296
20.3 ‘Mother Fore’ excerpt 297
21.1 Form of “White Ferrari” 304
21.2 Form of “Nights” 308
21.3 Reduction of Harmonic Progression from “Seigfried” (Opening) 309
21.4 Rotated Version of Figure 21.3 (“Seigfried,” 3:35–end)  310
22.1 “Bills Corpse,” transcription of Moments 1–7 318
22.2 Number of cell statements per moment 319
22.3a Rhythmic processes in “My Human Gets Me Blues” 321
22.3b Rhythmic processes in “Hair Pie: Bake 2” 321
22.4 Duration proportions in “Steal Softly Thru Snow” 322
22.5 Duration proportions in “Hair Pie: Bake 2” 322
22.6 Types of recordings on Trout Mask Replica324
22.7 Repeated cells in “The Blimp (mousetrapreplica)” 326
22.8 Form diagram of “The Blimp (mousetrapreplica)” 326
22.9 Duration proportions in “The Blimp (mousetrapreplica)” 327
24.1 Cover for the album/book, Here Lies Love, 2010 (deluxe edition) 350
24.2 Author transcription of the opening verse 1 of “Here Lies Love” 352
24.3 Author transcription of the opening chorus of “Over the Rainbow” 352
24.4 Photo by author of Here Lies Love programme cover and excerpt
of David Byrne’s essay that features “Madame Marcos” 358
25.1 The Path of Lacanian Drive in “Love Detective,” The Red Thread, 2001 366
25.2 Spy Theme, Bass Riff of “Love Detective” 366
25.3 Sound Layers in “Love Detective” 367
25.4 Towards a Deleuzian Model (I) 369
25.5 Towards a Deleuzian Model (II) 370
25.6 Towards a Deleuzian Model (III) 370
25.7 Cybernetic Production Across Three Dimensions 371
25.8 Sound Layers in “The First Big Weekend” 371
25.9 Ground Bass from “There Is No Ending” 373
25.10 Formal Design of “There is No Ending,” The Last Romance,
with Track Timings 374
25.11 Various Stages in the Desiring Production of Several Arab Strap Songs 375
26.1a The main riff from Pantera’s “A New Level” (1992). Brackets above the
staff show how a brief, chromatic cell is varied to create musical interest.
Brackets below the tablature shows how the intuitive fretboard pattern
gradually expands 380

xi
 Figures

26.1b Mahler’s Third Symphony, movement III, mm. 543–56. The upper
system shows the harp passage with a numerically ordered
sequence of rhythmic “-tuplets.” The bottom system shows how
that numbering continues as a countdown to the next section at
rehearsal number 32 380
26.1c An excerpt from Meshuggah’s I (13:15–14:07). Snare attacks
are indicated with circled numbers as a reference in place
of measure numbers 381
26.2 Gorguts’ Pleiades’ Dust (10:45–11:10), six-string bass part. The riff
plays three times before its fourth iteration is extended by new material 385
26.3 “Mad Architect,” orchestral interlude (ca. 2:03) 388
26.4 “Mad Architect,” orchestral interlude (ca. 2:08) 389
26.5 “Mad Architect,” orchestral interlude (ca. 2:23) 390
26.6 Unexpect, “When the Joyful Dead Are Dancing,” Verse C (0:35), samba
rhythm played by keyboard (rotary organ setting) 391
26.7 Unexpect, “When the Joyful Dead Are Dancing,” Verse A (0:03). Piano
transcription. The brackets indicate two-note repetitions and the breath
marks indicate brief pauses between attack points 393
26.8 Verse B (0:20).Vocal transcription, male (bottom staff ) and female (top
staff) voices. Although the male voice involves unpitched death metal
vocals, the instrumental accompaniment lends it an approximate
sense of pitch 393
27.1 Song openings. (a) Track 1: “The King of Carrot Flowers Part 1”
(b) Track 1: “The King of Carrot Flowers Part 1” (C) Track 2: “The King
of Carrot Flowers Part 2” (d) “The King of Carrot Flowers Part 3”
(e) Track 3: “In the Aeroplane over the Sea” (f  ) Track 4: “Two Headed
Boy” (g) Track 6: “Holland, 1945” (h) Track 7: “Communist Daughter”
(i) Track 8: “Oh Comely” (j) Track 9: “Ghost” (k) Track 10: “Untitled”  405
27.2 Liquidation of guitar introductions (a) “King of Carrot Flowers Part 1”
(b) “In the Aeroplane over the Sea” (c) “Two Headed Boy” (d) “Holland,
1945” (e) “Communist Daughter” (f  ) “Oh Comely”  406
27.3 Postlude, “The King of Carrot Flowers Part 2” 408
27.4 Tonicization of E 409
27.5a E minor episode, verse 3 409
27.5b E minor episode, verse 3 409
27.6a Common thematic cells (a) “Two Head Boy”, from “and when all is
breaking” (1’30”) (b) “Holland, 1945”, from “but then they buried her
alive” (0’24”)  410
27.6b Common thematic cells (a) “Two Head Boy”, from “and when all is
breaking” (1’30”) (b) “Holland, 1945”, from “but then they buried her
alive” (0’24”)  410
27.7 “Communist Daughter” gridlock 411

xii
 Figures

27.8 “Oh Comely”, from “Your father made fetuses” (2’52”) 412
27.9 “Oh Comely” (4’38”) 412
27.10 “Oh Comely,” part 3 (a) Wailing 1 412
27.10 “Oh Comely,” part 3 (b) “Goldaline”  413
27.10 “Oh Comely,” part 3 (c) Wailing 2 413

xiii
 TABLES

  6.1  Four-unit periodicity in “Take on Me” 80

  6.2  Formal structure of “Take on Me” 80
  7.1  Analytic Framework 97
  7.2  Summary of the nine chapter story by Hajo Mü ller 98
  7.3  Transmedia / Multimodal Narrative 99
  9.1  Complete Track Listing of Æ nima with Durations and Description 134
11.1  Parrott’s Tree-Structured List 165
11.2  The effect of emotions on the human voice 166
13.1  Heart, “Alone”, rhythm layers in verse, prechorus, and chorus 199
13.2  Cream, “White Room”, formal plan and section characteristics 200
13.3  Rush, “Freewill”, formal plan and section characteristics 201
13.4 The Beatles, “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds”, formal plan and section
characteristics  202
15.1  Songs using the central dyad discussed in this chapter 222
18.1  ELP’s deviations from Ginastera’s original composition 271
20.1  ‘Astronomy Dominé ’, The Piper at the Gates of Dawn (1967)  292
20.2 ‘Bike,’ The Piper at the Gates of Dawn (1967)  292
20.3  ‘Speak to Me’ into ‘Breathe,’ The Dark Side of the Moon (1973)  292
20.4  ‘Atom Heart Mother Suite,’ Atom Heart Mother (1970)  294
20.5  Formal design in the ‘Atom Heart Mother Suite’  294
20.6  ‘Funky Dung’ retransition to ‘Mind Your Throats Please’  297
20.7  ‘Mind Your Throats Please’ outline 298
20.8  Final retransition timeline  298
21.1  Lyrical References to Marijuana on Blonde301
21.2  Form of “Solo” 306
24.1  “Here Lies Love” Song Structure (2010) 351
24.2 “Here Lies Love” song structure (Original Cast Recording (2014)) 356

xiv
 Tables

26.1 Keightley’s tendencies for romantic authenticity and modernist

authenticity in rock 379
26.2 Compositional techniques reflective of conservatory training and an
interest in progressive rock 384
26.3 A formal diagram of the third movement of Pleiades’ Dust emphasizing
moments where an aesthetic favoring complexity is most obvious 387
26.4  Narrative segments in Unexpect’s “When the Joyful Dead Are Dancing” 392

xv
 PREFACE

The Routledge Companion to Popular Music Analysis: Expanding Approaches is a valuable

addition to popular music scholarship that widens the scope of popular music analysis.
Stimulated initially by a desire to incorporate methods, tools, and technologies developed
for contemporary art music in the service of widening the scope of popular music studies,
the book adopts and adapts classical techniques as well searching for brand-new bespoke
approaches where the material under scrutiny demands them. While many current articles
and books explore the theoretical interconnections between popular music and classical
music, relatively few studies examine the interconnection of popular and contemporary art
music, and oftentimes the critical-cultural apparatus developed for one medium does not
survive a cross-over into the other.
An exception could be found in the domain of tonality. The common practice tonal
language shared by much popular and classical music probably accounts for the preponder-
ance of the analytical focus being directed towards popular music’s tonal structure, but its
tonal structure and its connection to classical music paints an incomplete analytical, compo-
sitional, historical, critical, and cultural picture. This study creates new analytical paradigms
for examining popular music from the perspective of developments in the ways we under-
stand contemporary art music. The goal of the study, however, is not to categorize popular
music as high art music or categorize contemporary art music as popular, but to begin
exploring the relevancy of the categories that divide popular and art music and possibly
redefining or expanding those categories. In other words, the traditional categories may no
longer adequately reflect compositional and analytical techniques or the aesthetic objec-
tives of the music represented by the traditional categories. Moreover, demonstrating the
irrelevancy of the categories that have tended to divide popular and contemporary music
serve to demonstrate the appropriateness of rethinking the crossing over of techniques.
Viewing popular music from such new perspectives will bring fresh analytical insights into
its composition and form.
The chapters in the collection investigate a variety of analytical, theoretical, historical,
and aesthetics within a time frame that extends from the 1930s to the present day. The
authors of the chapters examine popular music (rock, hip hop, rap, pop, dance, electronica,
etc.) that use the processes, compositional techniques, aesthetic goals, and political subtexts

xvi
 Preface

that define 20th and 21st century art music as stimuli towards new expanded (and hope-
fully ever-expanding) approaches. The framework for the repertoire included in the com-
panion, however, is not global in scope since the study limits the examination of popular
music to English speaking countries (or for English speaking audiences). However, some
authors may occasionally analyze works from outside the geographical boundaries that have
a strong contemporary art music culture.
Expanded approaches for popular music analysis are broadly defined as any composi-
tional, analytical, theoretical, aesthetic, or cultural concept that goes further than current
scholarship towards our understanding of the pitch-class structures, form, timbre, rhythm,
aesthetics, or cultural significance of various forms of popular music. For example, several of
the chapters analyze atonal, serial, minimalist, and post-common practice tonal structures in
popular music while other chapters analyze the association of popular music timbral tech-
niques with composers such as Edgard Varè se and spectralist composers. Another fruitful
area of investigation is adapting rhythmic tools to analyze the complex rhythmic structures.
Some chapters break new theoretical and analytical ground for popular music by develop-
ing alternative methods of categorizing pitch-class structures, by developing methods for
analyzing electronic music and studio techniques, and by exploring the role technology
plays in the creation of popular music. For example, progressive rock and heavy metal often
use an expanded set of scalar resources that goes beyond the conventional collection of rock
scales such as major, minor, pentatonic, and modal. The expanded scalar resources compo-
sitionally function analogously to set-classes in normal form; therefore, a new method of
categorizing these scales could lead to new methods of analyzing their use in compositions.
Moreover, the chapters focusing on electronic music, studio techniques, and technology
could yield new methods of analyzing the timbral structure of a composition, the compo-
sitional process, and form. One consequence of eroding the boundary dividing popular and
art music is that techniques developed for the analysis of popular music may offer a fresh
vantage point for the analysis of contemporary art music, such as adapting techniques devel-
oped for the analysis of timbre in popular music to the analysis of contemporary art music.
The companion consists of five main sections: (1) Establishing and Expanding Analytical
Frameworks; (2) Technology and Timbre; (3) Rhythm, Pitch, and Harmony; (4) Form and
Structure; and (5) Critical Frameworks: Analytical, Formal, Structural, and Political. The
chapters in Part 1, Establishing and Expanding Analytical Frameworks, culturally situate the
cross-pollination of popular and 20th and 21st century art music, and establish the theoreti-
cal, analytical, and cultural frameworks for their interconnection. Some ruminate further
about why exactly it is important for us to analyze popular music in the first place, seeing
that much of popular music studies centers on the social context of the music’s produc-
tion rather than the “music itself.” The chapters in Part 1 also reevaluate the frameworks
that have shaped the analysis of popular music while also exploring alternative frameworks
that expand the analytical landscape. The chapters in Part 2, Technological and Timbre,
explore the influence of technology on the compositional and disseminating processes of
popular music.They also explore ways to meaningfully and fruitfully analyze popular music
in terms of technology, and they may suggest how technological tools and techniques
developed for popular music might inform the analysis of 20th and 21st century contem-
porary music. The chapters in Part 3 form a progression that begins with rhythm and ends
with post-tonal pitch-class analyses. The chapters in the middle of the progression fill the
gap with a study of drone and its effect on structure, 20th century approaches to tonality,
chromatic linear progressions in popular music, and a chapter outlining new frameworks

xvii
 Preface

for a­ pproaching pitch-class analysis in heavy metal that do not focus on triadic structures.
Part 4 features chapters that focus on form in popular music and its unique relationship to
form in 20th and 21st century contemporary music as well as chapters exploring the formal
and structural features unique to popular music.
Part 5 is an effective bookend for the volume since it returns to issues raised in Part 1,
but explores them from new perspectives.The chapters in Part 5 perhaps represent the most
expansive approaches taken in the study. The chapters address the consequences of the the-
oretical issues raised by the analytical articles for both the study of popular music and 20th
and 21st century art music, such as the re-definition of the categories of popular and art
music in the later 20th century. For example, should the categories popular and art music
be replaced with technical categories that describe compositional method? Minimalism, for
example, could be considered both art and popular music, but the appellation “minimalism”
also refers to a compositional technique. The chapters also address and undermine assump-
tions or mythologies about rock music genres, such as hard rock, metal, and shoe gaze.
With contributions by established scholars and promising emerging scholars in music
theory and historical musicology from North America, Europe, and Australia the chapters
in the volume offer a variety of nuanced and detailed perspectives that address relation-
ships between contemporary concert music and popular/rock styles of music. Furthermore,
many of the contributors are experts in both areas of study, which lends an air of authority
to the creation of a new analytical paradigm for both popular music studies and the study
of 20th and 21st century art music. The audiences for The Routledge Companion to Popular
Music Analysis: Expanding Approaches are theorists, analysts, musicologist, and popular music
scholars working in both areas. Recently, many music scholars have been advocating for a
larger role for popular music in the core theory curriculum in both higher education and
pre-university level. Expanding Approaches for Popular Music Analysis will be an invaluable
resource for educators seeking to incorporate popular music into their core curricula. Many
chapters will be a suitable resource material for undergraduate courses in popular music.
Moreover, we envision the volume as a suitable textbook for graduate analysis courses and
a primary research monograph for both popular and 20th and 21st century art music.

xviii
 PART 1

Establishing and Expanding

Analytical Frameworks
 1
SOME PRACTICAL ISSUES IN
THE AESTHETIC ANALYSIS
OF POPULAR MUSIC
Christopher Doll

The Analytical Object

Granting that aesthetic analysis can cast its light on a variety of musical phenomena—
individual performances, recordings, and so on—I take its chief object of concern to be
the musical work. Whatever a work exactly is, it surely is something more abstract than a
performance or a recording, even in the case of indeterminate scores or purely electronic
efforts.1 Nevertheless, music analysts working in the 21st century must confront the plain
fact that music now comes to us predominantly via digital media. While singers still sing,
and instrumentalists still hit and pluck and bow and blow, the vast majority of Western
music consumed these days, whether popular or classical (or any other type),2 comes to us
encoded as zeros and ones transmitted through earphones or loudspeakers. And yet, there is
a significant difference in the way digital media relate to our commonplace (if cloudy) con-
ceptions of popular versus classical works. The typical classical composer today—even the
spectralist—still writes scores to be performed (preferably repeatedly, and always with some
noticeable variation in sound), while the popular songwriter and producer and performer
(indeed, we really need to credit all these roles) concentrate on making recordings. Popular
works, by and large, are inseparable from the medium of recording, whereas classical works
are more often independent of it. This distinction holds less true for popular music before
the advent of multitracking in the mid-1950s, but of course there was far less popular music
created before this historical point than has been created since.
That a popular work should not simply be equated with a recording can be best argued
by way of example. Take the classic 1958 R&B track “(Night Time Is) The Right Time” by
Ray Charles and the Raelettes. The name of the song itself differs depending on the exact
source: some releases include parentheses and others do not, some releases put parentheses
around the title’s first half and others put them around its second half, some releases do
not feature the words “Night Time Is” at all. More problematic are the musical differences
an analyst may encounter when engaging, for instance, the digitally remastered mono mix
faithful to the original Atlantic Records 45rpm record, versus the digitally remastered stereo
version first released on the 1994 CD The Best of Ray Charles:The Atlantic Years (which drops

3
 Christopher Doll

“(Night Time Is)” from the title). In the earlier mono version, Raelette Margie Hendricks
sings backup until the song’s middle section (around 1:30), at which point she bursts into
a lead-vocal solo (with her repeated screams of “baby!”) supported by Charles and the
remaining Raelettes. In the later stereo version, Hendricks’s solo is pushed back in the mix,
while Charles’s vocal accompaniment and electric piano are bumped up; gendered stereo
separation also contributes to the change in sound, as the ladies are panned far left while
Charles is hard right. (Listening on earphones exacerbates this divide.) These two releases
derive from the same source material, and are ostensibly the same “recording,” yet the mid-
dle section in the stereo remix is not really a solo. In the latter version, Charles’ persona
shines through—his vocals no longer function merely as part of the accompaniment but
rather create a call-and-response lovers’ duet between him (with the other Raelettes) and
Margie (a mistress of Charles at the time).
As regards musical texture, then, the mono and stereo versions of “The Right Time”
feature middle sections that are categorically different. The actual content of the music can
thus depend on which specific release we have in front of us: the exact mix, the exact edit,
the exact remastering (and oftentimes these different versions are released simultaneously,
so we cannot simply chalk up differences to historical variation of preexisting material).3
Yet in a typical analytical setting, there is no advantage in recognizing two distinct musical
works based solely on variations in mixing, editing, remastering, and the like; rather, these
differences can easily be enumerated in relation to a single “open work” that accommodates
the variations, much like the concept of the open work is used to describe classical works
by John Cage, Karlheinz Stockhausen, and other experimental composers working with
indeterminacy and chance procedures.4 Such accommodation is all but required if we are to
consider both mixes to be versions of the work written and originally recorded by Nappy
Brown in 1957 entitled simply “The Right Time,” as presumably any and every analyst
would. At a certain point, however, differences between comparable recordings could be
so extreme that they must be considered indicators of separate works, as would doubtless
be the case when assessing Brown’s and Charles’s recordings against the 1937 track “Night
Time Is the Right Time” by The Honey Dripper (Roosevelt Sykes), despite the resem-
blance in their titles and the common 12-bar blues structure. (Their melodic and lyrical
profiles are utterly unalike.)
And yet, to accept the popular-music work as open to a certain degree of acoustic vari-
ation is not to extinguish all potential difficulties in defining the analytical object. One
important consequence of such an acceptance, for instance, is that any given remastered mix
might not be representative of a musical work as a whole. Analysts wishing to make claims
about works, then, must exercise due diligence in researching all available versions if their
assertions are to stand up to informed scrutiny. In many cases, problematic lines will still
need to be drawn between what is and is not the work, as one’s analytical purview reaches
bootlegs and various sorts of official and unofficial remixes.

Sound versus Score

The fundamental technological divide between popular and classical works reflects not
only a general difference in compositional method and ontological status but also a
logistical dissimilarity in their aesthetic analysis, namely the engagement of sound versus
score. Although popular-music analysis is made easier by the repertory’s propensity for

4
 Some Practical Issues in the Aesthetic Analysis of Popular Music

repetition, it simultaneously is complicated by the medium of sound itself, with new

difficulties in the form of psychoacoustical effects and densely layered multitrack mixes.
Visualization can help the analytical process, just as recordings can play a supporting role
in the analysis of classical works; but in most cases scores for popular music must be cre-
ated ad hoc by the analysts themselves, and depending on how seriously one takes the
activity of transcription, it can easily become the most difficult part of the analysis. In an
article investigating the song “A Hard Day’s Night” (1964), mathematician Jason Brown
runs a computer algorithm called a Fourier Transform to reveal the pitch structure of
The Beatles’ famous opening chord, studying all 29,375 frequencies sounded over a one-
second sample.5 Through a process of elimination, Brown makes an informed interpre-
tation as to which notes of the chord were fingered, based on their relative amplitudes
and on what was possible on John Lennon’s six-string and George Harrison’s 12-string
guitars—assuming standard tunings, and assuming there were no overdubs (but includ-
ing Paul McCartney’s bass and George Martin’s piano). See Figure 1.1. While Brown’s
analysis is unconventional in certain ways, it echoes some essential truths about analyzing
musical sound in general: that transcription is a part of—not prior to—analysis, and that
the more specific an analyst wishes to be in a transcription, the more she must rely on
assumptions and guesswork. (Think of how terrifically more complicated Brown’s analy-
sis would become were he to sample frequencies that do not simply resonate but rather
change over time.)
Every sonic parameter—pitch, rhythm, timbre, loudness—presents basic problems for
the transcriber. Loudness is the least offensive in its own right; its obstacles arrive mainly
in the form of auditory masking (the ear’s inability to decipher objectively frequencies in
certain combinations) and the relegation of some sonic elements to the back of the mix
(making them harder to identify). Timbre is difficult to even define, let alone analyze; it is
by far the hardest parameter to say something meaningful about, because theorists have yet
to develop and adopt a reasonably comprehensive analytical language to describe it.6 Pitch
and rhythm are both plagued by false notational choices and other biases imported from
the analysis of classical music; in the context of this essay collection, these issues demand
the closest attention. But before proceeding, it should be made clear these issues are not
confined to transcription in the strict sense; rather, they are unavoidable challenges in the
description of sonic elements in general—they are inherent to the activity of aesthetically
analyzing popular music.

Figure 1.1 Reduction of Brown’s Transcription of the “A Hard Day’s Night” Chord

5
 Christopher Doll

Pitch transcription can be a challenge vertically (harmonically), as suggested by the

“A Hard Day’s Night” chord, or horizontally (melodically), in the form of “blue notes” and
other intonationally unclear pitches.7 Additionally, pitches can hide inside sung syllables.
Listeners familiar with The Beatles’ “Here Comes the Sun” (1969) will likely recall the first
verse’s vocal line as something like the melody depicted in Figure 1.2a. However, George
Harrison is quite free in his vocal delivery, scooping into and dropping out of pitches, so much
so that it is possible to hear a line closer to the melismatic alternative given in Figure 1.2b
(which, despite its relative intricacy, is still notated as simply as possible, with plenty of pitch
and rhythmic rounding). The considerable difference between these two examples points up
the importance of having a clear answer to the question: “What is this transcription trying to
show?”8 Detail has its place, but so does simplicity. Indeed, scholar David Temperley specu-
lates (with reference to “Here Comes the Sun,” among other songs) that our brains store not
specific phrasings but rather the “deep structures” of melodies, which lack certain non-chord
tones and syncopations— something even simpler than version 1 in Figure 1.2a.9 Vocal per-
formance on the whole is so difficult to transcribe because our conventional Western notation
prioritizes individuated notes, even though notes are not quite so prioritized by our cognitive
processes (even when shaped by Western classical training).10
Rhythmic transcription is plagued by a multitude of issues,11 of which there are two
main kinds.The first is quantization, the rounding of attack and end points to some standard
durational level—the eighth note, the sixteenth, the triplet sixteenth—a necessity that fre-
quently challenges the transcriber again to find a suitable compromise between specificity
and readability.While instrumental grooves can be difficult in this regard, particularly when
they vary slightly over time (which they usually do unless they are sampled or sequenced),12
the most challenging element to quantize is probably vocal melody—as just witnessed in
“Here Comes the Sun”—but especially when transcribing the efforts of an accomplished
singer who uses the relative steadiness of the ensemble as a backdrop for fluid improvisation.
Scholar Peter Winkler has written candidly on his experience attempting to notate Aretha
Franklin’s vocal stylings in “I Never Loved a Man (The Way I Love You)” (1967), proffering
seven distinct versions of the opening melodic phrase, “You’re a no good heartbreaker.”13
The limits of durational notation are of course pushed not only by rubato; in the contem-
porary classical realm, a mass of precisely calculated rhythmic figures makes the scores of

Figure 1.2a Vocal Pitch in “Here Comes the Sun” Version 1

Figure 1.2b Version 2

6
 Some Practical Issues in the Aesthetic Analysis of Popular Music

Brian Ferneyhough and other New Complexity composers all but impossible to read.14
Complexity arises equally from freedom and conformity.
The second kind of problem in rhythmic transcription is metric interpretation, which
can be further broken up into three often-overlapping concerns: beat-tempo; on-beat ver-
sus off-beat; and beat-grouping. Since the advent of rhythm’n’blues and rock’n’roll in the
1950s, popular music has tended to feature a clear backbeat, a regular emphasis often played
on a snare drum that is typically interpreted by experienced listeners as beats 2 and 4 within
a group of four. This practice has major consequences for how listeners decide which
rhythmic level the beat occupies; however, there is also experimental evidence to suggest
that listeners tend to associate beats with the rhythmic level closest to 120bpm.15 A song like
“Sikamikanico” by Red Hot Chili Peppers (1992) clarifies what is at stake in beat-tempo
decisions; see Figure 1.3. Chad Smith’s snare drumming is initially clear (Figure 1.3a), pre-
senting an unambiguous backbeat and beat-tempo of roughly 130bpm (although this fluc-
tuates), but this pattern soon becomes more complicated when the voice enters for the
first verse (Figure 1.3b). (This second pattern actually varies subtly over time.) Different
complications arrive in the ensuing transitional section that sees the return of the initial
instrumental material (Figure 1.3c). Despite all these complications, the backbeat remains
relatively stable until the pre-chorus (Figure 1.3d), where the snare quickens its pace, dou-
bling the speed of the previous backbeat. The chorus then takes that doubled backbeat
and fills in the remaining double beats (1, 2, 3, and 4) with snare attacks (Figure 1.3e). An
eventual bridge section changes the pattern in the opposite direction, slowing down to a
pace half that of the intro (Figure 1.3f). The song’s outro features snare attacks at double
the rate of the previously fastest pattern in the chorus (Figure 1.3g). Although this song is

Figure 1.3a Snare Drum Patterns in “Sikamikanico” Transcribed in One Tempo, Intro

Figure 1.3b From Verse

Figure 1.3c From Transition

Figure 1.3d Pre-Chorus

7
 Christopher Doll

Figure 1.3e Chorus

Figure 1.3f From Bridge

Figure 1.3g Outro

an extreme example, it does lay bare common types of decisions an analyst must make in
determining beat-tempo: one can habitually assign beats to the level closest to 120bpm as
depicted throughout Figure 1.3, but one might instead wish to convey the sectional shifts
that so viscerally characterize the song with concomitant changes in beat-tempo, especially
if we are confronted with altogether different backbeats, as we are at the pre-chorus (con-
tinuing through the chorus and outro) and the bridge.
Distinguishing between on-beats and off-beats (including beats versus subdivisions),
is usually not so difficult as identifying beat-tempos, but analysts of popular music will
undoubtedly encounter the widespread phenomenon of the metric fake-out, wherein a
song creates the effect—through accents or lone attacks—of a pulse that is later displaced
to form a backbeat (heard in the beginning of The Beatles’ 1964 “She’s a Woman”) or sub-
division (as happens in David Bowie’s 1980 “Fashion”). The typical fake-out is not much
of a transcriptional problem, because it is so routine and normally gets righted before the
singer enters.16 Yet havoc can ensue when the original “fake” pattern persists. Songs such as
Joan Armatrading’s “Heaven” (1983) and The Police’s “Bring on the Night” (1979) are not
done justice by transcriptions that rely on single interpretations of downbeats, upbeats, and
subdivisions;17 the aural discombobulation created by these tracks surely deserves depiction
in the score, but precisely how to accomplish this is not obvious, because our notational sys-
tems were not designed with this purpose in mind. The inherent limitations of traditional
metric notation have not been lost on classical composers: for example, the song “Autumn”
(1908) by Charles Ives gives the aural impression of a displaced vocal line accompanied by
thick, beat-defining chords in the lower register of the piano, even though the notation
suggests the opposite arrangement (on-beat vocals and off-beat chords, a fake-out that per-
sists so long it ceases to be fake); see Figure 1.4. At the word “radiantly,” an even lower bass
note, C 2, recontextualizes the vocal line as aligned with the piano and with the notated
on-beats; after the song’s climax on the word “smiles,” the lower bass line evaporates, and
the vocals once again occupy perceptual off-beats but notated on-beats. This all occurs
without a single change in the notated meter, a fact that could conceivably be interpreted
as a critique of the notation itself, given Ives’ contrasting penchant for extravagant metric
markings in many of his other scores.

8
 Some Practical Issues in the Aesthetic Analysis of Popular Music

Figure 1.4 Displacement and Alignment in “Autumn,” mm. 12–19

The last problematic component of metric interpretation is beat-grouping. Is the

Charleston-esque 3+3+2 groove heard in Coldplay’s “Clocks” (2002) and Radiohead’s
“Lotus Flower” (2011), or the clave/hambone 3+3+4+2+4 groove used in Bo Diddley’s
“Bo Diddley” (1955) and Johnny Otis’s “Willie and the Hand Jive” (1958), better expressed
with changing meters or with cross-rhythmic accents against a steady meter?18 Should an
analyst notate the riff of Pink Floyd’s “Money” (1973) as a straightforward 7/4 (occasionally
giving way to 4/4 or 8/4), or do the competing layers of 3+4 in the electric bass and 4+3
in the snare drum demand a polymetric description? More mundanely, should we notate
The Beatles’ “Baby’s in Black” (1964) and the verses of “I Me Mine” (1970) in (shuffle)
3/4, even though a backbeat is articulated on the downbeat of every other bar, or should
they be understood as a larger 12/8 with the triplet-level consigned to subdivisions? What
about “Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)” (1965) and the verses and pre-choruses of
“Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” (1967), which are similarly 3/4 or 12/8 but lack a clearly
articulated backbeat? Such questions arise out of the vagueness—or flexibility—of classical
metric notation itself. This is not just an academic, literary concern. Experimental studies
have suggested that metric identity is aurally linked to pitch identity, in that a series of notes
and durations understood in two different metrical contexts oftentimes goes unrecognized
by listeners as being the same series at all.19 Whatever the dangers of unrecognition (and
granted that they are low in the case of a short 3/4 versus a long 12/8), there is no deny-
ing that rhythm very much matters in this music, and should thus be taken seriously in
transcription—i.e., analysis.

What’s in a Numeral?
Further problems await the analyst of popular music in the form of inherited but ill-­
fitting analytical standards.These are especially acute in the realm of pitch, probably because
pitch has been, more than any other musical parameter, the subject of intense theoriza-
tion over several centuries. Consider how we might describe Steve Jones’s guitar riff from
The Sex Pistols’ “Submission” (1976).20 Among the most basic elements of the riff that we

9
 Christopher Doll

Figure 1.5 Pentatonicism in “Submission”

p­ resumably would want to identify are the chords, which include C5, E 5, F5, and B 5
with a tonal center of C. If we wish to assign roman numerals to these chords, we must
decide how to address the E 5 and B 5: are they  III5 and  VII5, or III5 and VII5, or some
combination of the two? While there are a variety of conventional approaches to roman
numerals, none were designed with this sort of harmonic palette in mind, that palette being
based in minor pentatonicism: C, E , F, G, B . See Figure 1.5.
Yet the challenge posed by pentatonicism is actually far deeper than merely deciding
whether to assign accidentals to numerals. Indeed, the initial designation of the Pistols’
chords as C5, E 5, F5, and B 5, while allowed within our conventional diatonic system,
suggests that there are two gaps: there is no version of D or A, just as there is no ver-
sion of   or   , or II or VI. The staff notation likewise suggests two vacancies. The notes
of the chords add up precisely to a complete C minor pentatonic scale, yet the diatonic
numbers, letters, and staff we would assign to describe these pitches insinuate a specific
shortfall. The mismatch between seven-note analytical infrastructure and non-seven-note
music creates the potential danger of a false standard: for example, it would be a mistake
to assume diatonic incompleteness in a melody or harmonic progression simply because
it is based on a pentatonic scale.21 A priori, pentatonicism is not incomplete diatonicism,
any more than diatonicism is incomplete chromaticism. This is not tantamount to saying
that a particular pentatonic melody could not possibly sound diatonically incomplete in
some specific instance; the claim here regards the inherent relationship between pentato-
nicism and diatonicism represented respectively by the music and the analytical method.
Whole-tone music suffers from a similar problem. On the other side of the seven-note
standard are octatonic, highly chromatic, and microtonal works, which strain diatonic
infrastructure through their inclusion of too many tones—as the accidental-laden scores
of classical composers from Richard Strauss to Harry Partch confirm. While any non-
seven-note-based music suffers similar problems, the likelihood of employing an analyti-
cal false standard is far greater in the case of popular-music pentatonicism specifically, due
to the fact that the (black-key) major and minor pentatonic scales ubiquitous in popular
music can be made to fit entirely within the (white-key) major and natural minor dia-
tonic scales, although always in three different rotations: e.g., C–Eb–F–G–Bb– C fits into
C dorian, C aeolian, and C phrygian.
The potential for a false, or at least arbitrary, standard also commonly arises with regard
to chord type. Are the power chords of “Submission” incomplete triads because they do
not supply a chordal third, or are they merely differently defined sonorities? Do the fifth
harmonic partials sounding from Steve Jones’s amplifier count as chordal thirds? Should the
triad (and third-stacked harmonies more generally) dictate how we analyze chord tones
versus non-chord tones? Are “sus” chords (e.g., Csus4=CFG) independent sonorities or are

10
 Some Practical Issues in the Aesthetic Analysis of Popular Music

they to be understood as awaiting resolution to a triad as the “suspension” notation itself

implies?22 These issues, and to a lesser extent polychords and quartal harmony, are routine
problems the analyst must confront in popular music, whether regarding mainstream styles
like punk or electronic dance music, or in fringe substyles like drone metal or post-rock.
They can all be summed up by the following question: what is the nature of the tonality
in this repertory—is it a throwback, an ironic revision, a new language altogether, or an
incoherent bricolage of otherwise familiar tropes? This is a concern familiar to analysts
of Post-Romanticism, Neo-Classicism, Minimalism, Neo-Romanticism, and every other
kind of contemporary classical “ism” that reminds us of the pitch structures of previous
centuries.23 We can apply the old standards, develop altogether new standards, or deploy
some combination of the two; in any case, it is advisable to apply one’s analytical standards
consciously and conscientiously, and not allow them simply to be uncritically dictated by
inherited conventions.

Song
The bulk of popular-music works are songs.This fact carries with it two further broad impli-
cations for aesthetic analysis, the final two to be posed in this essay. The first is that the
musical scope of popular works tends not to mirror that of much classical music, because
the typical popular song is rather brief compared with the expansive designs favored by so
many classical composers (and analysts). In this light,Theodor Adorno’s infamously unfavora-
ble assessment of Tin Pan Alley songs as measured against symphony and sonata movements
by his beloved Beethoven—rather than against Beethoven’s own songs—is comically inapt:
apples to oranges, as the saying goes.24 While popular songs can sometimes be analyzed in the
context of entire albums or old-fashioned LP sides (as in the celebrated case of The Beatles’
1970 Abbey Road medley),25 longer-range musical connections in general are more fruitfully
pursued within the context of genre and style. This is to say, popular-music analysis benefits
from an intertextual perspective. Nowhere is this point more obvious than in hip hop, where
sampling is a fundamental component of compositional practice; if one is to understand a
given sample-laden song, one must understand the relationship between it and the preexisting
material drawn upon. But an intertextual approach is no less revealing of non-sampling songs.
Just as in classical music, genres and styles are inescapable guiding forces with which any and
every popular work, regardless of length, creates a dialogue.The analyst looking for long-range
motivic connections, on the other hand, is not likely to get much satisfaction.
The other implication is that analysts must come to terms with how to engage text,
on its own and in relation to the rest of the music.26 This is perhaps the most significant
aesthetic concern in all of popular-music analysis, because the sheer presence of lyrics so
naturally allows—indeed, encourages—the facile attribution of extra-musical meaning to
these works. The acquisition and articulation of meaning, most assuredly, is the primary
motivation for pursuing music and musical analysis at all; but lyrics are often not lucid, and
tones by themselves as signifiers are ambiguous at best. (Recall Igor Stravinsky’s notori-
ous but shrewd claim: “I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to
express anything at all.”27) The meanings of songs are not necessarily (or ever) shared among
all its listeners, its analysts included, so those of us wanting to tease out the expressive nature
of songs must guard against the temptation to treat every conceivable connection between
words and tones as objective evidence of some grand intelligent design. Confirmation bias

11
 Christopher Doll

finds a natural ally in unlimited semiotic speculation. Thus, just as analysts have the right
to advance any meanings they want, so too do analysts have the right—and sometimes the
responsibility—to outright reject them, or at least to cast them in the proper subjective
light. Stronger hermeneutic claims, that move us beyond this endless circle dance, demand
stronger evidence; assertions about large-scale authorial intentions, for instance, surely
require more proof than the ability of an analyst to shove a song or collection of songs into
this or that analytical mold. Meaning is too important to be addressed in any but the most
serious and cautious of manners.
Lest this most important of topics be muddled, I should conclude by stating unequivo-
cally that aesthetic analysis is by its very nature, in its entirety, an activity in pursuit of
meaning. It is meaningful to identify a song as a musical work, to transcribe its pitches and
rhythms, to consider its relationship with diatonic conventions, to examine its internal and
external relationships tonal and textual alike. As with all meanings, however, the results of
aesthetic analysis only truly function as meanings among like-minded individuals. From this
perspective, the ultimate job of analysis is to convince those around us that the meanings we
find are illuminating, stimulating, and reflective of our underlying passion for the music. If
our analyses can accomplish this, then the time and energy we devote to overcoming these
abundant practical issues will not be expended in vain.

Notes
1 Philosophers disagree about the precise nature of the relationship between popular-musical
works and recordings/performances. See, for example, Theodore Gracyk, Rhythm and Noise: An
Aesthetics of Rock (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1996); and John Andrew Fisher, “Rock
’n’ Recording:The Ontological Complexity of Rock Music,” in Musical Worlds: New Directions in
the Philosophy of Music, ed. Phil Alperson (University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 1998),
109–123; and Franklin Bruno, “A Case for Song: Against an (Exclusively) Recording-Centered
Ontology of Rock,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 71, no. 1 (Winter 2013): 65–74.
2 This essay’s simple binary of popular versus classical music (to the exclusion of any other music)
is meant as nothing more than a useful contrivance to engage a readership likely invested in both
bodies of music. Many of the issues addressed in this essay apply equally well to jazz, world music,
and other repertories.
3 See also Albin J. Zak III, The Poetics of Rock: Cutting Tracks, Making Records (Berkeley, Los
Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 2001); and Walter Everett, “‘If You’re
Gonna Have a Hit’: Intratextual Mixes and Edits of Pop Recordings,” Popular Music 29, no. 2
(2010): 229–250.
4 See Umberto Eco, The Open Work, translated by Anna Canogni (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1989).
5 Jason I. Brown, “Mathematics, Physics and A Hard Day’s Night,” CMS Notes 36, nos. 4–8 (2004).
6 For some recent work on timbral analysis, see Brad Osborn, Everything in Its Right Place:Analyzing
Radiohead, Oxford University Press, chapter 4; David K. Blake, “Timbre as Differentiation
in Indie Music,” Music Theory Online 18, no. 2 (2012); and Kate Heidemann, “A System for
Describing Vocal Timbre in Popular Song,” Music Theory Online 22, no. 1 (2016).
7 According to Paul McCartney, Beatles producer George Martin had a terrible time transcribing
the melody of “A Hard Day’s Night,” specifically John Lennon’s sung pitch at the end of the
word “workin’,” which Lennon himself claimed was neither F nor E (Bill Flanagan, “Boy, You’re
Gonna Carry That Weight,” Musician 139 [May 1990], 46).
8 Scholarly writings on transcription abound. A few places to start include Charles Seeger,
“Prescriptive and Descriptive Music-Writing,” Musical Quarterly 44, no. 2 (April 1985):
184–195; Ter Ellingson, “Transcription,” in Ethnomusicology: An Introduction, ed. Helen Myers

12
 Some Practical Issues in the Aesthetic Analysis of Popular Music

(New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1992), 110–152; and Jason Stanyek, Forum on
Transcription, Twentieth-Century Music 11 (2014): 101–161.
9 David Temperley, “Syncopation in Rock: A Perceptual Perspective,” Popular Music 18, no. 1
(January 1999): 19–40. Temperley’s surface-level transcription of “Here Comes the Sun” is close,
although not identical, to that of Figure 1.2a. See also David Temperley, The Cognition of Basic
Musical Structures (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001), 239–47. Hearing the background struc-
ture of a melody requires that we know what counts as structure versus embellishment, and this
itself is not always altogether obvious.
10 See Robert O. Gjerdingen, “Shape and Motion in the Microstructure of Song,” Music Perception
6, no. 1 (1988): 33–64.
11 See also Anne Danielson, ed., Musical Rhythm in the Age of Digital Reproduction (Surrey and
Burlington: Ashgate, 2010).
12 See David Brackett, Interpreting Popular Music (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of
California Press, 2000[1995]), 137–44.
13 Peter Winkler, “Writing Ghost Notes: The Poetics and Politics of Transcription,” in Keeping
Score: Music, Disciplinarity, Culture, eds. David, Schwarz, Anahid Kassabian, and Lawrence Siegel
(Charlottesville,VA: University Press of Virginia, 1997), 169–203.
14 See also Milton Babbitt, “Twelve-Tone Rhythmic Structures and the Electronic Medium,”
Perspectives of New Music 1, no. 1 (Autumn 1962): 49–79, especially 73–74.
15 Dirk Moelants and Martin McKinney, “Tempo Perception and Musical Content: What Makes
a Piece Fast, Slow, or Temporally Ambiguous?” Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on
Music Perception and Cognition (2004): 558–562. Trevor de Clercq discusses some of the compet-
ing estimates of ideal tempo (Trevor de Clercq,“Measuring a Measure: Absolute Time as a Factor
for Determining Bar Lengths and Meter in Pop/Rock Music,” Music Theory Online 22, no. 3
[September 2016]: § 2.1–2.9). See also Justin London, “Tactus ≠ Tempo: Some Dissociations
Between Attentional Focus, Motor Behavior, and Tempo Judgment,” Empirical Musicology Review
6, no. 1 (January 2011): 43–55, and Bruno H. Repp, “Comments on ‘Tactus ≠  Tempo: Some
Dissociations Between Attentional Focus, Motor Behavior, and Tempo Judgment’ by Justin
London,” Empirical Musicology Review 6, no. 1 ( January 2011): 56–61.
16 Madonna seems to bank on the customary fake-out correction in order to create a surprise in
1986’s “Papa Don’t Preach,” which begins with what seems like a fake-out but that instead fol-
lows the beat established by the upper-string accents rather than the (ostensibly beat-defining)
lower tones.
17 On the meter of “Bring on the Night,” see Nathan Hesselink, “Rhythmic Play, Compositional
Intent, and Communication in Rock Music,” Popular Music 33, no. 1 (2014): 69–90. On
Armatrading’s music in general, see Ellie Hisama, “Voice, Race, and Sexuality in the Music
of Joan Armatrading,” in Audible Traces: Gender, Identity, and Music, eds. Elaine Barkin and Lydia
Hamessley (Zurich: Carciofolo Verlagshaus, 1999), 115–131.
18 On beat-grouping and other metrical issues in popular music, see Mark J. Butler, “Turning
the Beat Around: Reinterpretation, Metrical Dissonance, and Asymmetry in Electronic Dance
Music,” Music Theory Online 7, no. 6 (December 2001); and Nicole Biamonte, “Formal Functions
of Metric Dissonance in Rock Music,” Music Theory Online 20, no. 2 (2014).
19 See, for example: Dirk-Jan Povel and Peter Essens, “Perception of Temporal Patterns,” Music
Perception 2 (Summer 1985): 411–440; and Stephanie Acevedo, David Temperley, and Peter Q.
Pfordresher, “Effects of Metrical Encoding on Melody Recognition,” Music Perception 31, no. 4
(April 2014): 372–386.
20 Jones’s intentionally clunky riff is most likely modeled on that of The Kinks’ “All Day and All of
the Night” (1964).
21 See Mieczyslaw Kolinski, “The Determinants of Tonal Construction in Tribal Music,” Musical
Quarterly 43, no. 1 (January 1957): 55. Scholar David Lewin makes a similar case about the artificial
incompleteness created by analyzing Bach’s D major fugue subject from the Well-Tempered Clavier
Book II according to a diatonic system, as opposed to the better-fitting Guidonian hexachord (“The
D Major Fugue Subject from WTCII: Spatial Saturation?,” Music Theory Online 4, no. 4, 1998]).

13
 Christopher Doll

22 Theorists’ long-standing tradition of conflating non-chord tones with dissonances (i.e., “contex-
tual dissonances,” as opposed to “acoustical dissonances”) further muddies these waters.
23 For in-depth discussion of analytical standards for popular-music tonality, see Christopher Doll,
Hearing Harmony:Toward a Tonal Theory for the Rock Era (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
Press, 2017).
24 Theodor W. Adorno, “On Popular Music,” in Essays on Music, ed. Richard Leppert, translated
by Susan H. Gillespie (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 2002
[1941]).
25 See Walter Everett, “The Beatles as Composers:The Genesis of Abbey Road, Side Two,” in Concert
Music, Rock, and Jazz since 1945: Essays and Analytical Studies, ed. Elizabeth West Marvin and
Richard Hermann (Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 1995), 172–228.
26 See Dai Griffiths, “From Lyric to Anti-Lyric: Analysing the Words in Popular Song,” in Analysing
Popular Music, ed. Allan F. Moore (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 39–59.
27 Igor Stravinsky, Chronicle of My Life, translator uncredited (London:Victor Gollancz, 1936), 91.

14
Thank You for the Music
Adorno, Theodor. Essays on Music. Selected, with Introduction, Commentary, and Notes by Richard Leppert.
Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2002.
Dettmar, Kevin and William Richey , eds. Reading Rock and Roll: Authenticity, Approaches and Aesthetics.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.
Frith, Simon. Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1996.
Goodwin, Andrew. “Popular Music and Postmodern Theory,” Cultural Studies 5, no. 2 (1991): 174–190.
Grossberg, Lawrence. “Putting the Pop Back into Postmodernism,” Social Text 21 (1989): 167–190.
Martin, Peter. Sounds and Society: Themes in the Sociology of Music. Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 1995.
McClary, Susan. Conventional Wisdom. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2000.
Moore, Allan. Rock, The Primary Text: Developing a Musicology of Rock. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001.
Negus, Keith. Popular Music in Theory. Cambridge: Polity, 1996.
Negus, Keith. Music Genres and Corporate Cultures. London: Routledge, 1999.
Potter, Russell. Spectacular Vernaculars: Hip-Hop and the Politics of Postmodernism. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press, 1995.
Sabin, Roger , ed. Punk Rock: So What? The Cultural Legacy of Punk. London: Routledge, 1999.
Schloss, Joseph. Making Beats: The Art of Sample-based Hip-Hop. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University
Press, 2004.
Stokes, Martin , ed. Ethnicity, Identity and Music: The Musical Construction of Place. Oxford: Berg, 1994.
Temperley, David. “The Melodic-Harmonic ‘Divorce’ in Rock,” Popular Music 26, no. 2 (2007): 323–342.
Toynbee, Jason. Making Popular Music: Musicians, Creativity and Institutions, London: Arnold, 2000.

A-ha’s “Take on Me”

Griffiths, Dai. “Elevating Form and Elevating Modulation.” Popular Music XXXIV, no. 1 (2015): 22–44.
Hawkins, Stan , and John Richardson . “Remodeling Britney Spears: Matters of Intoxication and Mediation.”
Popular Music and Society 30, no. 5 (2007): 605–629.

Analysing the Product of Recorded Musical Activity

Moore, Allan F. Analyzing Popular Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Smalley, Denis. “Space-form and the acousmatic image.” Organised Sound 12, no. 1 (2007): 35–58.
Le Grand Kallé et African Jazz , 1961. Indépendance Cha Cha: African Jazz Brussels AJ.1 M.101.
Trio Matamoros , 1929. El Manicero. His Master’s Voice GV-3.

“What Music Isn’t Ambient in the 21st Century?”

Eno, Brian. Ambient 1: Music for Airports. Editions E.G. AMB 001, 1978, LP.
Eno, Brian. Ambient 4: On Land. Editions E.G. EEGCD 20, 1986, CD. Originally released in 1982.
Eno, Brian , with Daniel Lanois and Roger Eno. Apollo: Atmospheres & Soundtracks. Editions E.G. EGCD 53,
1990, CD. Originally released in 1983.
KLF , The. Chill Out. Wax Trax! WAX 7155, 1990, CD.

Pulse as Dynamic Attending

Clarke, Eric F. Ways of Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Jones, Mari Riess .“Attending to Sound Patterns and the Role of Entrainment.” In K. Nobre (ed.) Attention and
Time. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, 317–330.
Keil, Charles. “The Theory of Participatory Discrepancies: A Progress Report.” Ethnomusicology XXXIX, no. 1
(1995): 1–19.
Kvifte, Tellef. “Categories and Timing: On the Perception of Meter.” Ethnomusicology 51.1 (2007): 64–84.

347Here Lies Love and the Politics of Disco-Opera

Lawrence, Tim. “In Defense of Disco (Again).” New Formations, LVIII, (Summer 2006): 128–146.
Middleton, Richard. “‘Play it Again Sam’: Some Notes on the Productivity of Repetition in Popular Music.”
Popular Music III, (1983): 235–270.
Moore, Allan . (Ed.) Analyzing Popular Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Byrne, David , and Fatboy Slim . Here Lies Love (Deluxe Version). Double CD, DVD and book, Nonesuch
Records and Todomundo, 2010.
Byrne, David , and Fatbly Slim . Here Lies Love: Original Cast Recording. Double CD and book, Nonesuch
Records and Todomundo, 2014.
Byrne, David , and Fatboy Slim . The Remix Collection from Here Lies Love. CD, Todomundo, 2014.
Diaz, Ramona (dir.) Imelda: The Movie. Makati City: Unitel Pictures, 2003 Saturday Night Live. Season 14:
Episode 5. Aired November 12, 1988. Retrieved from: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctw_8596i38
Alcazaren, Mike , and Jeannette Ifurung (dirs.) Batas military: A Documentary About Martial Law in the
Philippines. Pasig City: Foundation for World Wide People Power, 1997.

The Love Detective

Abbate, Carolyn. Unsung Voices: Opera and Musical Narrative in the Nineteenth Century. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1991.
Bailey Shea, Matt. “The Hexatonic and the Double Tonic: Wolf’s Christmas Rose.” Journal of Music Theory LI,
no. 2 (2007): 187–210.
Cohn, Richard. “Hexatonic Poles and the Uncanny in Parsifal.” Opera Quarterly XX, no. 2 (2006): 230–248.
Arab Strap , The Week Never Starts Round Here, Chemikal Underground (1996).
Arab Strap , The Red Thread, Chemikal Underground (2001).
Arab Strap , Monday at the Hug & Pint, Chemikal Underground (2003).
Arab Strap , The Last Romance, Chemikal Underground (2005).

Unending Eruptions
Atkinson, Peter. “Septicflesh ─ Interview with Christos Antoniou”. Metal Rules (July 5, 2014). Accessed 19
November 2016 www.metal-rules.com/metalnews/2014/07/05/septicflesh-interview-with-christos-antoniou/.
Baker, Ross. “The Purest Form of Art – An Interview with Ihsahn.” Ghost Cult Magazine 13 (October 2013).
Accessed 18 November 2016 https://rossbakerjournalist.com/2013/12/30/interview-with-ihsahn/.
Bell, Albert. “Metal in a Micro Island State: An Insider’s Perspective.” In Metal Rules the Globe: Heavy Metal
Music around the World, edited by Jeremy Wallach , Harris M. Berger , and Paul D. Greene , 271–293.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011.
Greene, Paul D. “Electronic and Effective Overdrive: Tropes of Transgression in Nepal’s Heavy Metal Scene.”
In Metal Rules the Globe: Heavy Metal Music around the World, edited by Jeremy Wallach , Harris M. Berger ,
and Paul D. Greene , 109–134. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011.
Guibert, Christophe and Gérôme Guibert . “The Social Characteristics of the Contemporary Metalhead: The
Hellfest Survey.” In Global Metal Music and Culture: Current Directions in Metal Studies, edited by Andy R.
Brown , Karl Spracklen , Keith Kahn-Harris , and Niall Scott , 167–189. New York: Routledge, 2016.
Halnon, Karen. “Heavy Metal Carnival and Dis-alienation: The Politics of Grotesque Realism.” Symbolic
Interaction 29, no. 1 (2006): 33–48.
Hein, Fabien. Hard rock, heavy metal, metal: histoire, culture et pratiquants. Paris: IRMA; Nantes: Mélanie
Séteun, 2003.
“Interview: Ihsahn.” Invisible Oranges (November 6, 2013). Accessed 18 November 2016
www.invisibleoranges.com/interview-ihsahn-2/.
Lefteris, Kefalas . “Septicflesh”. Subexistance. (December 6, 2011). Accessed 29 November 2016
http://subexistance.com/interviews/septic-flesh.
Lockard, Craig. Dance of Life: Popular Music and Politics in Southeast Asia, Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii
Press, 1998.
Muršič, Rajko . “Noisy Crossroads: Metal Scenes in Slovenia.” In Metal Rules the Globe: Heavy Metal Music
around the World, edited by Jeremy Wallach , Harris M. Berger, and Paul D. Greene , 109–134. Durham, NC:
Duke University Press, 2012.
Roccor, Bettina. Heavy Metal: Kunst. Kommerz. Ketzeri. Berlin: Iron Pages, 1998.
St-Laurent, Méi-Ra. “L’analyse des paramètre narrato-musicologique dans l’élaboration du récit
phonographique transgressif: le cas du metal extrême.” MA thesis, Université Laval. 2013.
Van Valkenburg, Aaron. “Musical Process and the Structuring of Riffs in Metallica.” MA thesis, Baylor
University. 2010.
Varas-Díaz, Nelson, Eliut Rivera-Segarra , Carmen L. Rivera Medina , Sigrid Mendoza , and Osvaldo
González-Sepúlveda . “Predictors of Communal Formation in a Small Heavy Metal Scene: Puerto Rico as a
Case Study.” Metal Music Studies 1, no. 1 (2015): 87–103.
Wallach, Jeremy. “Distortion Drenched Dystopias: Metal and Modernity in Southeast Asia.” In The Metal Void:
First Gatherings, edited by Niall W. R. Scott and Imk Von e Helden , 357–365. Oxford: Inter-Disciplinary Press,
2010.
Weinstein, Deena. “The Globalization of Metal.” In Metal Rules the Globe: Heavy Metal Music around the
World, edited by Jeremy Wallach , Harris M. Berger , and Paul D. Greene , 34–59. Durham, NC: Duke
University Press, 2012.
Gorguts. Obscura. Compact Disc. Olympic Recordings 008 633 129-2, 1998.
Meshuggah . I. Compact Disc. Fractured Transmitter Recording Company FTRC 001, 2004.
Meshuggah . Catch Thirtythr33. Compact Disc. Nuclear Blast NB 1311-2, 2005.
Pantera . Vulgar Display of Power. Compact Disc. Atco Records 7 91758-2, 1992.
Septicflesh . Communion. Compact Disc. Season of Mist SOM174, 2008.
Septicflesh . The Great Mass. Compact Disc. Season of Mist SOM229, 2011.
System of a Down. System of a Down. Compact Disc. Sony Music Distribution 68924, 1998.
The Beatles . Revolver. LP. Capitol Records ST-2576, 1966.
Tool . Lateralus. Volcano, Tool Dissectional. Compact Disc. 61422-33017-2 CD, 2001.
Unexpect . The Fables of the Sleepless Empire. Compact Disc. Independent. 2011.
Unexpect . _we, Invaders. Compact Disc. Galy Records GALY-014, 2003.
Unexpect . Utopia. Compact Disc. Self-release [No catalogue number], 1999.
Vital Remains . Dechristianize. Compact Disc. Olympic Recordings OLY 0229-2, 2003.

“Poet-Composers”
Cohen, Leonard. Songs of Leonard Cohen. Columbia Records CS 9533, 1967.
Cohen, Leonard. Songs from a Room. Columbia Records CS 9769, 1969.
Collins, Judy. In My Life. Elektra EKS-7320, 1966.
Collins, Judy. Wildflowers. Elektra EKS-74012, 1967.
Dylan, Bob. The Times They Are a-Changin’. Columbia Records CL 2105, 1964.
Dylan, Bob. Another Side of Bob Dylan. Columbia Records CL 2193, 1964.
Mitchell, Joni. Song to a Seagull. Reprise Records RS 6293, 1968.
Mitchell, Joni. Clouds. Reprise Records RS 6341, 1969.
Mitchell, Joni. Ladies of the Canyon. Reprise Records RS 6376, 1970.
Mitchell, Joni. Blue. Reprise Records MS 2038, 1971.
Mitchell, Joni. Miles of Aisles. Asylum Records AB 202, 1974.